G.R. No. 101949 - The Holy See - Vs - The Hon. Eriberto U. Rosario, JR
Uploaded by
Mira LeG.R. No. 101949 - The Holy See - Vs - The Hon. Eriberto U. Rosario, JR
Uploaded by
Mira LeG.R. No.
101949 December 1, 1994
THE HOLY SEE, petitioner,
vs.
THE HON. ERIBERTO U. ROSARIO, JR., as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of
Makati, Branch 61
and STARBRIGHT SALES ENTERPRISES, INC., respondents.
Facts:
The case "The Holy See v. Rosario, Jr." involves a land dispute in Parañaque, Metro Manila.
The petitioner, The Holy See, represented by the Papal Nuncio, exercises sovereignty over
Vatican City.
The private respondent, Starbright Sales Enterprises, Inc., is a domestic real estate corporation.
The dispute centers on a 6,000 square meter parcel (Lot 5-A) registered in The Holy See's name,
contiguous to two other lots (5-B and 5-D) registered to the Philippine Realty Corporation (PRC).
Initially, all three lots were sold to Ramon Licup, who later assigned his rights to Starbright.
A dispute arose concerning who was responsible for evicting squatters from the lots.
The Holy See sold Lot 5-A to Tropicana Properties and Development Corporation without
notifying Starbright.
On January 23, 1990, Starbright filed a complaint with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati
for annulment of the sale, specific performance, and damages.
The RTC denied The Holy See's motion to dismiss the complaint based on sovereign immunity.
The Holy See filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court to reverse
the RTC's orders dated June 20, 1991, and September 19, 1991.
Issue:
1. Does the Regional Trial Court have jurisdiction over The Holy See, given its claim of sovereign
immunity?
2. Can the Department of Foreign Affairs intervene in the case on behalf of The Holy See?
Ruling:
1. The Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari and dismissed the complaint in Civil Case
No. 90-183 against The Holy See.
2. The intervention of the Department of Foreign Affairs was allowed, and its certification of The
Holy See's diplomatic immunity was accepted.
Ratio:
The Supreme Court ruled that The Holy See enjoys sovereign immunity from suit as a recognized
foreign sovereign state.
The acquisition and disposal of Lot 5-A by The Holy See were for constructing the official
residence of the Papal Nuncio, not for commercial purposes.
The property was donated by the Archdiocese of Manila for this specific purpose, and the sale to
Tropicana was necessitated by the presence of squatters.
The sale of the property was deemed a governmental act, not a commercial transaction, thus
falling under sovereign immunity.
The Department of Foreign Affairs formally intervened and certified The Holy See's diplomatic
immunity, which is a political question conclusive upon the courts.
The Court concluded that a trial to establish the facts was unnecessary given the certification
from the Department of Foreign Affairs.
Starbright is not left without a remedy; it can seek redress through diplomatic channels by asking
the Philippine government to espouse its claims against The Holy See.
